Covered California Officials Admit They Need To Do More To Attract Latinos

Your browser does not support inline frames or is currently configured not to display inline frames. Content can be viewed at actual source page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSrSuLoJLTg

Above: We speak with Covered California Spokeswoman Lizelda Lopez and Gary Rotto, director of health policy at the Council for Community Clinics San Diego about what you need to know as the Dec. 23 Affordable Care Act deadline approaches.

California is not the only state facing this issue. Kevin Counihan directs Connecticut’s exchange, called Health Access CT. He said Latino enrollment in his state is also low.

“I would say this is an area where I think we need to do a better job," Counihan said. "Our Spanish version of the website is not coming up for a month, and that’s delayed. And I think that there’s more that we need to do.”

Covered California officials agree. They admit that more than two months after the exchange opened for business, there still isn’t a paper application available in Spanish.

Officials say they also need to hire more enrollment counselors who speak the language.

The exchange has set a goal of enrolling 700,000 Californians in subsidized health plans by the end of March.

I suppose that was a little bit of an unfair, blanket generalization. But the stereotype is there, Dave Chappelle even joked about it, so I think there is some truth to it. When I used to drive a car, I was hit two separate times by Latinos, once while driving, another time while parked, and both times, the drivers were uninsured. So in my personal experience with Latinos on insurance related matters, I have found that 100% of them did not buy insurance.

Thanks for posting your comments on this story. We encourage you to share your thoughts, but please do so while adhering to our Community Discussion Rules. As stated: "Personal attacks, insults, profanity, hate speech or harassment based on class, disability, ethnicity, gender, national origin, religion, race, sexual orientation or other offensive conduct will not be permitted."

PDSD, I'm in favor of individual responability and freedom. Your suggestionwould be very considerate though it should be a last resort after many other options are exhausted. e.g. savingsmedial line of creditcollateralized loan unsecured loan charityorgan sales

And I was talking about people who go to the emergency room with a critical medical condition who can't pay. I was asking if they should be turned away.

Someone who needs immediate medical care doesn't have time to go to banks begging for loans, throwing themselves at the mercy of charities, and the like.

I find the idea of the richest country in the world requiring people to resort to selling organs instead of supplementing healthcare to be absurd.

Any nation on earth is going to have rich and poor, that's just fact.

You can choose to argue about WHY that is and blame the poor for being irresponsible, or you can look at the good if the ENTIRE COUNTRY and realize that EVERYONE bennefits from a healthy society where ALL people have basic healthcare access.

While I disagree with you completely on this Benz, I do wish you and your family a merry Christmas.

PDSD, " look at the good if the ENTIRE COUNTRY and realize that EVERYONE bennefits from a healthy society where ALL people have basic healthcare access."

This is where I see the wheels coming off that argument... If the population you were describing were providing production required to keep the country viable they would be able to afford those medical services. The fact that they cannot points toward their being non-essential.

"I find the idea of the richest country in the world requiring people to resort to selling organs instead of supplementing healthcare to be absurd." This seems an odd stance to take as well. If you have $2M and I am a pauper we are not each millionaires. The money has to come from somewhere, and the appropriate source is the recipient of the service. If the hospital gets to put a spare kidney into someone who needs it and can afford to cover the cost of both treatments what is the downside? It seems Win-Win-Win to me.